-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
I'm looking for some articles about the industry crashing?
- Thread starter Reilly
- Start date
The industry is too big for a full on crash like it did in the 80's. What people are seeing is consolidation... which any industry goes through. Big companies emerge... buy up smaller companies... people succeed, people fail, oh blah dee... oh blah da... life goes on.
We're also in the middle of generational transitions. This leads to lower profits from companies as old systems stop selling as well... excitement builds for the newer stuff but people don't all go out and buy at once. They sell fewer games while console prices come down to mass market acceptance levels and then the REAL sales begin.
We're also in the middle of generational transitions. This leads to lower profits from companies as old systems stop selling as well... excitement builds for the newer stuff but people don't all go out and buy at once. They sell fewer games while console prices come down to mass market acceptance levels and then the REAL sales begin.
I think a lot of people aren't getting the idea that the crash will come from rising dev costs versus rising gamers. I suggest everyone look at this link especially.
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cach...mes+industry"+crisis&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=1
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cach...mes+industry"+crisis&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=1
BudokaiMR2
Member
Burgundy said:
For one I don't believe it is going to crash either, but it is still possible.
This is liking saying the Soviet Union wouldn't break down because it is too big back in the 1908s.
You can't really look into the future and make clear predictions, it is impossible.
Burgundy said:Graphics over gameplay has been going on for well over 20 years now... deal.
People BUY graphics over gameplay which keeps the industry in business.
Oh I have been dealing, I have been buying less games as a result since most games store don't let you return shitty games.
Just like the movie industry, people are going to be demanding more than just pretty graphics. Prices will rise and game companies will wonder why people aren't buying their shit.
People act like the developers aren't and haven't been adjusting to this for years already. For example... many companies would use the portables (which will generally always be easier to develop for with less resources) to make up a lot of money with some quick games. Might not be the case with the average PSP game, but there's still a lot of smaller games that can find great success on the little systems.
In addition to that, we're seeing more games released at budget levels right out of the starting gates.
It's just like the movie industry. There are your 200 million to make movies that tank and your 2 million budget movies which make 100 million.
In addition to that, we're seeing more games released at budget levels right out of the starting gates.
It's just like the movie industry. There are your 200 million to make movies that tank and your 2 million budget movies which make 100 million.
evilromero
Member
It'll be interesting to see if the PS3 is innovative enough to pull the market out of its slump. I'm sure the prospect of a Blue-Ray player will definitely be a driving force early on and ultimately usher in two transitions at once.
On the other hand, what Microsoft is doing is precisely what some scholars believe to be what makes successful companies fail. In the words of Mr. Lessig (although from his book used to describe communications/software giants):
What we can definitely see is a clear innovative strategy on the part of Nintendo to discover a new audience, although at very high stakes. But it is Nintendo, and possible the PS3 although like was stated it is merely delivering marginally improved design, that could usher in the spurt of energy needed. To better describe what I mean:
On the other hand, what Microsoft is doing is precisely what some scholars believe to be what makes successful companies fail. In the words of Mr. Lessig (although from his book used to describe communications/software giants):
What we can definitely see is a clear innovative strategy on the part of Nintendo to discover a new audience, although at very high stakes. But it is Nintendo, and possible the PS3 although like was stated it is merely delivering marginally improved design, that could usher in the spurt of energy needed. To better describe what I mean:
Monk said:
Handheld games don't have to sell more units to make more money in comparison.
Wasn't Katamary released at a budget price? You think this is a bad thing?
And yes... a lot of big budget games are tanking... and this *IS* a good thing in theory, because it should force companies to develop smarter... not just doing things because they can.
If they want to earn your hard earned dollar... they're going to have to earn it if they want to stay in business.
I never argued that. But you argument is that smaller devs can make games on a handheld and find it easier to make a profit which is not true.
For the consumer and from the point of view of units sold it is a good thing. But for publishers they have to sell twice as much to make a profit.
It isnt that simple. The cost of deving games is increasing not because the devs are stupid but because of the minimum requirements that increase with each gen. The only way that these costs can be reduced is with the tools supplied by the console maker and other middle ware makers. And even then it it determined by how robust it is.
And if the tools are robust there is the danger that games start to look the same and that causes a decrease in sales. The problems are all coming from different areas that should be adressed. Some of the refer to profit issues and other problems refer to quality issues.
Patrick Klepek
furiously molesting tim burton
Monk said:
That's a poor point taking into consideration Katamari Damacy's likely development cost to Namco.
Monk said:
I said "smaller developers?" Sorry for not being more explicit. I was mainly referring to the larger companies hedging bets. Sort of like how THQ would shovel licensed stuff on the GBA.
Remember that old lemonade stand game we played when we were kids? Where the object was to find the right mix of everything including price point to maximize profit? Yes... they'd have to sell more to make the same money... but at the same time, the likelyhood of selling more could go up dramatically at lower price points.
Of course costs are going up for development... however, we're also at a point where, creatively, developers don't need all of the power that the consoles are ready to dish out. There's a lot of room for the art to take over if the market allows for it.
It's in the console maker's best interest to provide the best support to their developers and they know this. If everything starts looking the same... then that IS because developers aren't trying to seperate themselves from the pack. This is where the artistic vision comes into play if they allow it.
eXxy said:
How so? They still have to sell twice as much than at regular prices to make a profit.
Say the game cost 1 million to make. If they sell at budget price, they get $10, and at regular price $20.
It is the difference between requiring 100 000 copies sold versus 50 000 sold. And todays games cost 5-7 million dollars to make.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3078404/
Next gen dev cost will be 50-100% more than that. So they have to sell twice as many games so they will be around 10 million each.
So imagine making a game for 5 million is considered "budget" next gen, and at budget price, they have to sell half a million units just to break even.
Monk said:Ah, ok. Yu and I aare talking completely different things.
Nice, I agree.
But sometimes art is just not enough, sadly it is about realism to the young'ens these days(see psychonauts). And realism costs money.
Yeah... I figured we were talking about different angles there for a minute.
Yes... sadly art does take a backseat for the bulk of games today... and that's what will cause some industry shakeout, and I think that is a good thing.
The stock market goes through 'corrections' all the time, and I'd argue that's what the gaming industry is doing right now. It's just unfortunate that good games get lost, but that's also something that isn't new in this industry.
Do you think people are going to not want to play video games anytime soon? There is demand for it... HUGE demand for it. It's not going anywhere, even if some major players implode. Someone or something will fill the demand.
Say if Ford goes under... or hell... all American car companies go under... are people going to all of the sudden stop driving?
Say if Ford goes under... or hell... all American car companies go under... are people going to all of the sudden stop driving?
Cymbal Head
Banned
Monk said:
That was a good read, even though it was just in outline form. Excellent analysis that I more or less agree with.
Burgundy said:
What's with you? I've sat here too long without saying something. Stop making these asstasic analogies! The games industry is nothing like the movie industry. The same goes for the auto industry. Apples and oranges!
ANY industry can crash. Video games are not exempt.
MightyHedgehog
Member
The console industry crashed because it was effectively just one console dominating it, the Atari 2600. The computer and arcade game scene lived perfectly well without it. So, to say that the industry, as it is now, will crash is, well, pretty unlikely, IMO. Unless Sony continues to increase its dominance and starts to widen the gap between it and its competitors (putting them out of the game), there's little chance of that happening on an industry-wide level.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Burgundy said:
According to GAF, the answer is 'YES'. :lol
Seriously.
Apples to oranges my foot. If the industry collapsed tomorrow... the demand for product isn't going anywhere. Gaming is mainstream now. We may be playing on different stuff 5 years from now, but people will still want games and there will be companies making money off of that fact.
The players may change... the game goes on.
Apples to oranges my foot. If the industry collapsed tomorrow... the demand for product isn't going anywhere. Gaming is mainstream now. We may be playing on different stuff 5 years from now, but people will still want games and there will be companies making money off of that fact.
The players may change... the game goes on.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Burgundy said:
CO-SIGN.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
elostyle said:
Lets be honest elostyle okay! I know nothing about the PS3 and you know nothing about the Nintendo Revolution. This is the reason and ONLY the reason why people talk about this gaming crash.
As soon as Sony releases PS3 info this website will explode. Then when we find out more Rev info this board will explode again. And then count in the great success of the DS and PSP and think how and why will gaming crash?
Because of the X360?
The Atari crash also happened when the industry was just starting. There are so many differences between then and now that it's not even funny. The idea of buying a replacement appliance after only 5 years was completely foreign for example.
The management that brought Atari up was gone, replaced by corporate people who really didn't know what to do with the company. The industry was learning... making plenty of mistakes and it's biggest player went down.
In the meantime, people were playing games elsewhere before the NES brought it back to the mainstream. The Commodore 64, for example, was a killer machine for gaming during 'the dark times.' Gaming didn't go anywhere... it just moved.
It's not like it was during the Atari crash. People are accepting of the upgrade cycle. The market for electronic entertainment is huge. Sure, there are a lot more people trying to fill that demand, which dilutes everything and leads to people speculating about doom and gloom scenarios, but the reality is that a repeat of the great crash of the 80's is hardly something that could happen unless something seriously went wrong with the overall world economy.
The management that brought Atari up was gone, replaced by corporate people who really didn't know what to do with the company. The industry was learning... making plenty of mistakes and it's biggest player went down.
In the meantime, people were playing games elsewhere before the NES brought it back to the mainstream. The Commodore 64, for example, was a killer machine for gaming during 'the dark times.' Gaming didn't go anywhere... it just moved.
It's not like it was during the Atari crash. People are accepting of the upgrade cycle. The market for electronic entertainment is huge. Sure, there are a lot more people trying to fill that demand, which dilutes everything and leads to people speculating about doom and gloom scenarios, but the reality is that a repeat of the great crash of the 80's is hardly something that could happen unless something seriously went wrong with the overall world economy.
Barry Lightning
Banned
continue to play games for a few more years. we're looking at another one pretty soon
Hardware has nothing to do with it. Genres are dying, remaining once are nailed down to the smallest details, everything is franchised and updated yearly. Drinky once drew a comparsion to the comic market in the 80s or whenever that was which I think was spot on. I mean, most sequels these days pretty much bomb or do much worse than their predecessors (RE4, Burnout revenge, viewtiful joe...).mckmas8808 said:
Not even specialized retailers are doing gaming any good with all their preorder scams and pushes for used games. The state of gaming journalism is pretty similar to the what it was before the atari crash as well with no differentiation in scores, dependency on publishers, catering to hype, being "official" or even tied to retailers.
Online distribution models with independent games like steam and live arcade might eventually rescue gaming.
Burgundy said:
Demand for a product is not going to go, but profitability will be compromise to the point that publishers wont even offer original games for the most part(not like that isn't happening now). And we will get nothing but franchise games(also happening now). Which i hate to see.
When that happens gaming will shrink back to a kids market that you "grow out of". All three hardware manufactures are trying to solve this problem in their own way.
MS: XBLA
Nintendo: Non Games
Sony: Ways to make development cheaper(reusing trees and landscapes etc.)
The biggest problem with the gaming industry is the quality and shithead store clerks who know jack all about games. You also see a greater promotion of franchise games thant original high quality games. Gaming needs to come to the quality and usability of movies today. They need to get to a poitn where all games are at a mass market price and that wont happen without growth.
Instead of crashing, i think the industry is in danger of becoming stagnant.
Seeing how the video game industry could die out is quite simple. You just look as what keeps the industry alive and kicking.
What keeps the video game industry alive and kicking? The demand for video games.
In searching for a plausible scenario of how the game industry could crash, the question should not be "If all the developers closed their doors tomorrow, would gamers stop wanting games?". We already know the answer to that. The developers left, but the demand for games did not cease so there is still money to be made, therefore new developers would only come to fill that demand.
The question that should be really researched is "What could happen to make the demand for video games disappear?" because without that demand, the video games industry would die.
To the question at hand, I pose but one answer. Something better comes along.
I think we can all agree that if something similar to video games, yet vastly superior came along, eventually video games would be replaced by that better something.
What keeps the video game industry alive and kicking? The demand for video games.
In searching for a plausible scenario of how the game industry could crash, the question should not be "If all the developers closed their doors tomorrow, would gamers stop wanting games?". We already know the answer to that. The developers left, but the demand for games did not cease so there is still money to be made, therefore new developers would only come to fill that demand.
The question that should be really researched is "What could happen to make the demand for video games disappear?" because without that demand, the video games industry would die.
To the question at hand, I pose but one answer. Something better comes along.
I think we can all agree that if something similar to video games, yet vastly superior came along, eventually video games would be replaced by that better something.
MightyHedgehog
Member
It's been stagnant to varying degrees over the course of time. Clones and a lot of bad product have loaded the shelves for the lifetime of the video game industry. But that's how it is with any arts/entertainment industry. People looking seriously at this supposed downturn of the industry need to put things in a more realistic perspective.Monk said: